Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2012
Hip resurfacing in patients under thirty years old: an attractive option for young and active patients.
Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Amount and type of physical activity and sports from one year forward after hip or knee arthroplasty-A systematic review.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Antioxidant System and Ions Concentrations After Femoral Neck and Resurfacing Hip Arthroplasty.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2022Article
- Hip Resurfacing vs Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Younger than 35 Years: A Comparison of Revision Rates and Patient-Reported Outcomes.Arthroplasty today · 2021Article
- A Comparative Cohort Study With a 20-Year Age Gap: Hip Resurfacing in Patients Aged ≤35 Years and Patients Aged ≥55 Years.Arthroplasty today · 2021Article
- Higher blood loss and transfusion requirement in surface arthroplasty versus conventional total hip replacement.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2019Article
- Outcomes after revision of metal on metal hip resurfacing to total arthroplasty using the direct anterior approach.International orthopaedics · 2018Article
- Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patients younger than 50 years: a retrospective analysis : 1285 cases, 12-year survivorship.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2017Review
- Early aseptic loosening of cementless monoblock acetabular components.International orthopaedics · 2017Article
- The effect of a manufacturer recall on the threshold to revise a metal-on-metal hip.International orthopaedics · 2014Article
- No association between serum metal ions and implant fixation in large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.Acta orthopaedica · 2014Article
- Correlation between groin pain and cup design of hip-resurfacing implants: a prospective study.International orthopaedics · 2014Article
- Surface arthroplasty increases blood loss and transfusion requirement in comparison with conventional total hip replacement.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2013Article
- Can patients return to high-impact physical activities after hip resurfacing? A prospective study.International orthopaedics · 2013Article
- Direct Anterior Approach to Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty.JBJS essential surgical techniquesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMetal-on-metal hip resurfacing is offered as an alternative to traditional hip arthroplasty for young, active adults with advanced osteoarthritis. The concept of hip resurfacing is considered very attractive for this specific population (hard-on-hard bearing component with a large femoral head limiting the risk of dislocation, and allowing femoral bone stock preservation).
methodsA prospective clinical trial was designed to investigate the outcome of hip resurfacing in young patients (under 30 years old). We studied 24 hips in 22 patients. Mean age at operation was 24.9 years (range 17.1-29.9). No patient was lost to follow-up.
resultsThere was no revision at average follow-up of 50.6 months (44-59). Mean UCLA activity score improved from 5.5 (1-9) pre-operatively to 7.6 (1-10) postoperatively (p < 0.001). Mean Harris hip score increased from 43.9 (19-67) to 89.3 (55-100) (p < 0.001). Radiological analysis discerned no osteolysis and no implant migration.
conclusionThe absence of short-term complications, such as mechanical failure or dislocation, is encouraging and leads us to think that mid-term results will be satisfactory. Moreover, the specific advantages of hip resurfacing (bone stock preservation, excellent stability, low risk of dislocation, large-diameter head) make the procedure a very attractive option for young subjects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.